Windows Vista SUCKS!

:badpc: Thats pretty much it...

I've been told it runs better on Mac's

How'd you get suckered into that bugpack? Hell, I didn't even start running XP until a few months ago...

The fact that Vista ships on a DVD (instead of a CD-ROM) is enough to make me wonder just how much of it isn't going to work... Windows has been getting bloated enough as it is without needing extra room...

I didnt get suckered into it so much as my last laptop died and, well, all the new PCs come with Vista. It sucks chode...has anyone uploaded XP back onto their Vista PC/Laptops? Does it work? :rattle:

GauchoMD said:

I didnt get suckered into it so much as my last laptop died and, well, all the new PCs come with Vista. It sucks chode...has anyone uploaded XP back onto their Vista PC/Laptops? Does it work? :rattle:

Click to expand...

Yup, Vista sucks. I had the same thing happen to me over teh summer. My Dell died on me out of nowhere, so I picked up an Acer. For the amount of money I had to spend, I couldn't afford to get one in which i could choose the OS, so my new one had Vista. First thing out of the box, without even making recovery disks (stupid), I popped in the XP cd, thinking i would be able to load it and dual boot. I partitioned it and all that, but basically, XP wiped out the Vista stuff, and vice versa. I called Acer like "wtf?" and they said yea, they don't work on teh same hard drive. so, long story short, I'm stuck with Vista. You can actually downgrade to XP, probably just call the manufacturer customer service and they will give you the downgrade license, or atleast thats what I've been told.

The main problem you will probably run into though is finding drivers for all of your stuff for XP. Thats why I haven't even messed with it on mine.

Over the last few months I have grown accustomed to it, and as much as i dont like it, its not THAT bad, i guess. I lost interest in the flashy crap in vista pretty soon after getting it, so turning off the glass effects and Sidebar and the other crap thats running helps to speed it up.

So yea, it is a p.o.s. but it works-most of the time. I do still think that my Dell laptop with the single core 1.6ghz and 1gb ram was faster than this one, which is 1.68ghz and 2 gb ram.

A word of advice, make sure to do plenty of restore points especially before installing new software. I have vista on my fujitsu laptop and iv installed software that was supposed to be vista ready that hosed other software and the only fix was going back to a restore point.

A friend of mine was about to leave for Iraq and he asked me what kind of laptop to get. I reccomended Toshiba. He goes out and gets what he can afford, which comes with 512 megs of RAM and Vista. That thing was slower than a Tandy. My first impression of vista: Vista is the Prettiest, slowest, and most annoying OS I have ever tried to use. Why in the hell should it ask you 3 times for every action you try to perform, 1. if it is you that is trying to perform the action?. 2. Is it ok to perform this action? 3, I'm gonna do it, are you sure?

I wiped it and installed XP. Then I went on a hunt for drivers. It took a few days working in my free time, but I finally found enough drivers to make it functional. Still no modem driver though, and Toshiba was ZERO help through the process. I have a big F-U for Vista stuck in my head.

on my comp vista works great im having zero issues

01_XJ said:

I do still think that my Dell laptop with the single core 1.6ghz and 1gb ram was faster than this one, which is 1.68ghz and 2 gb ram.

Click to expand...

Vista does run considerably slower than XP on the same machine. Vista is quite a resource hog. It is best to stick to XP until vista gets improved.

Why dont you just reformat the drive and install XP. It takes me less than a few hours to reformat, intall XP, and install all desired programs. I dont think that having vista on the drive will effect anything once the drive is reformatted. I do it about once every other year on my computers just to clean it up.

I haven't had a problem yet.

My cousin works for Microsoft up in Seattle.

He told me not to get Vista...yet. That's good enough advice for me.

I LOVE Vista!!!!!

Working on computers as a side business, it has brought me many opportunities to upgrade hardware, replace programs and upgrade networks. It has made me a nice chunk of change. Busy all the time.
My employer as an example. Traded (up?) his whole network for Vista units. Desktops, laptops etc. Nothing works. He had to replace everything. Printers, scanners, routers, modems, I mean everything. The employees are red hot pissed. Nothing migrated over correctly, data was lost. I had to reconfigure emails, contacts. Hilarious, I got to take a week off from work, charge him my labor time (my business) to get things to maybe 25% operational to bare minimum until the computer rep could show up in three weeks.
The highest OS I have is XP 64bit. Mostly XP machines, two 98se machines and a Linux one for hacking.
Way to go Micro$haft!!!

KRAKER said:

I've been told it runs better on Mac's

Click to expand...

It DOES!!!

97CountryXJ said:

It DOES!!! Curious........

Click to expand...

PC World Magazine tested Vista speed on several laptops. A Mac was the fastest.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,136649-page,3-c,notebooks/article.html


Vista was 6 years in the making, and it's still )!@#$%*. Mac OS X has had 5 major versions come out in that time, each more amazing then the last. The difference between a new OS release from Apple vs Microsoft: People are excited about the new release of OS X and can't wait to get it and have little to no worries that it will be a great improvement. They line up outside the store on the release date. You get free shirts at every store and it's a major event. I asked my father-in-law if he was going to go to Vista, and he said "heck no! That scares me." That made me laugh.

I've been running Vista since mid March and I'm very happy with it. In my opinion, it's a big improvement over XP. Of course, I'm running it on a 2.4GHz Core2 Duo with 2GB RAM. If your COMPUTER sucks then I guess you won't like Vista, but I'd hardly call that Microsoft's fault.

Most of the problems aren't with modern processors and monster memory, its about what hardware compatibility headaches you'll run into. Video cards, printers and scanners are the bulk of the BS problems that MS Vista has. Then when you get into the 64bit version of Vista, driver problems start opening up even with Vista approved hardware.
If I remember correctly the bare minimum to run Vista would be something like a 2Ghz processor with 1GB of ram. My laptop has that, but I still refuse to install Vista. M$ is crap. Revert to XP, get Linux, even try a Mac, or fork out the cash for everything new.
NOT worth all the eye candy.

Daedalus454 said:

I've been running Vista since mid March and I'm very happy with it. In my opinion, it's a big improvement over XP. Of course, I'm running it on a 2.4GHz Core2 Duo with 2GB RAM. If your COMPUTER sucks then I guess you won't like Vista, but I'd hardly call that Microsoft's fault.

Click to expand...

Which is a bit of the point. Why insist on selling a machine with an OS that it can't handle, and make absolutely no effort to support an OS that the machine will handle.

Personally, I HATE software that does everything for you, because it always does it wrong. When a software tries to mask everything it is doing, and gives you three warnings every time you try to open a program that wasn't written by the same parent company, and buries all of the simple ways to fix everything under four gellatin colored windows I think it sucks, no matter how good it may have the potential to be,

The people in control keep trying to dumb down the interface so that the end user has less and less understanding of what he's using to the point where he starts to say "I Don't care as long as it works." Which is fine until one day it doesn't.

While I certainly agree with you that the Vista UI takes some getting used to, I find that while it's different I don't necessarily like it better or worse than XP. When transitioning from Windows 3.1 to Windows 95 I had much the same response as many seem to be having to Vista. I thought it sucked, but ultimately I learned to use it and even prefer it over Win3.1/DOS. I overcame my dislike of the UI due to the underlying technological enhancements that were beneficial and eventually required for many applications. While many insist that Vista is nothing more than a visual UI retool of XP, nothing could be further from the truth. Vast amounts of underlying source code were completely rewritten in the interest of speed and compatibility. I can tell a huge difference in the stability of my system with XP vs Vista - Vista wins hands down.

As far as hardware compatibility goes, I personally haven't had much trouble. In March when I first switched to Vista, my NVidia drivers for my video card were awful. They didn't even support the native resolution of my widescreen LCD. The Sound Blaster drivers worked, but weren't anything to write home about. Now the drivers are much more robust. While the XP Sound Blaster drivers do have more functionality than the Vista drivers, nVidia has really gotten their act together and made some great drivers. Never had any trouble with my printer, though. I tend to blame the hardware manufacturers for bad drivers, though. It's not like they didn't know that Vista was coming for ~5 years.

I'm with you on the "software that does everything for you" angle. That's the exact reason I hated Windows 95 so much. But after some experimentation, I've found that Vista is much more customizable than most people give it credit for. Most, if not all, of the automated "helpfulness" can be turned off via the new, unnecessarily obfuscated Control Panel.

I'm certainly not a Microsoft Fanboi or anything, if you don't want to run Vista then don't, I don't care. If you have hardware below the *recommended* (not bare) minimums, then don't even think about it, you won't be at all happy with it.

And before anyone complains about Vista using up half your RAM just to boot, I should explain that this is a feature called precaching. Vista preloads around 40% of your system RAM with the most commonly used programs on your computer, so when you launch one of these apps, it starts a lot more quickly. XP does it too, just not nearly as aggressively.

I just enjoy sharing my positive Vista experience. It seems to me that most of the people who bash Vista have never run it - and I mean RUN it, really given it a chance, given yourself a chance to get used to it and learn how it works. That's what it took to get me to Win95, I had to *force* myself to use it for about 2 weeks.

One cannot run Vista (well) without atleast 2GB of RAM.

My wife has had it for 10 months now (and I think continuously on) and it has never crashed or had an issue with it. Antoher cool feature for you bilingual folks, is that all the IMEs are integrated without having to install them on top of Office manually.